[font=Arial, sans-serif]Now I wasn't sure if this was something I should have put on world news or philosophy but anyway what do you think about our so-called growing economy? I understand the reason behind currency and why we exactly need it but why set us up for failure? You would think that people would worry about our infinitely growing population ,thus economy, that the plundering resources would become a problem. How are we going to keep the supply up with the demand when earth clearly has limited things we commonly use. I really get a sick feeling knowing that my children or their children would have to go through the devastation of[/font] living in a world with less than enough resources to support them I mean if we thought poverty and starving was bad now. Imagine nearly 80% of the world having no food because I doubt the highly populated cities can manage being so concentrated with people.

American throw away, and waste 40 % of their food. http://www.nbcnews.com/business/american...udy-959078
I also think over-population is a problem, eventually, but not because of food.
I think we ain't seen nuthin yet, in terms of numbers of people.
Glad I live now, and not when the population will be 5 times what it is now.

Insufferable know-it-all.
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche

(04-02-2013 03:13 AM)bbeljefe Wrote: As technology progresses, we become more resource efficient. Today there is more food available to our population than there was 100 years ago and then, more than 100 years prior.

The problems you see around the world with poverty and starvation have nothing to do with resources, they are the direct result of government intervention.

That I do agree with and you are right we do have more food compared to back then but to what point will it not matter once the fertile land and clean water are no longer there? We cant necessarily make resources themselves but only find better ways of harvesting them so what happens when their is not enough to support a common society. Obviously this isn't something that would happen so easily or quickly but it will happen which is what makes me wonder because there is not actual way of avoiding this.

(04-02-2013 05:03 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote: American throw away, and waste 40 % of their food. http://www.nbcnews.com/business/american...udy-959078
I also think over-population is a problem, eventually, but not because of food.
I think we ain't seen nuthin yet, in terms of numbers of people.
Glad I live now, and not when the population will be 5 times what it is now.

Yea it makes no sense to have everything made in mass. For example if a company makes a million tvs but only around 500,000 are in demand then why have all those extra tvs? What usually happens is that they are sold for cheaper making them more available which in turn leads to more being used/wasted. And when I mean extra surplus of tvs I mean more then what the population could ever need ,this is but a simple example to explain what I mean by this

"~but to what point will it not matter once the fertile land and clean water are no longer there?"

There are millions of acres of uninhabited, fertile land in the US alone. We aren't using it now because we don't need it, but when we do, it will still be there. Moreover, we have no way of knowing what lies around the corner, technologically speaking. It might be safe to presume that if some new technology doesn't come along and make it easier for us to produce food on much less land, then we'll face a problem at some point in the future but it is entirely unreasonable to presume that technology won't continue to advance.

As for water, it's my understanding that there's no more or less water on the planet today than there was a million years ago. So again, if we need to prepare more of it for human consumption, we'll figure out how to.

I don't believe in a 'growing economy' as I've never seen evidence to support the existence that the economy can grow. I have a substantial amount of evidence that the economy has been falling sharply of recent years though.

(04-02-2013 08:22 PM)bbeljefe Wrote: "~but to what point will it not matter once the fertile land and clean water are no longer there?"

There are millions of acres of uninhabited, fertile land in the US alone. We aren't using it now because we don't need it, but when we do, it will still be there. Moreover, we have no way of knowing what lies around the corner, technologically speaking. It might be safe to presume that if some new technology doesn't come along and make it easier for us to produce food on much less land, then we'll face a problem at some point in the future but it is entirely unreasonable to presume that technology won't continue to advance.

As for water, it's my understanding that there's no more or less water on the planet today than there was a million years ago. So again, if we need to prepare more of it for human consumption, we'll figure out how to.

Well how about I re-word that because fertile land and water were not a very good examples. Lets say something like iron, for say that the mines no longer contain mineral ores to smelt iron. Now if you take in consideration how use so much of it and how wasteful we can be ,as a world, with what its used for. I doubt recycling would go as far as to make up for the empty reserves since we kinda do that but still need the supply itself. That would mean any iron related product would no longer be in production even with stocks of iron that may be built up I do not think they would last to long. So what do we do from their? Again this is an example but to dramatically replace something that is used so commonly through out the world ,how would that work? I think it simply wouldn't leading to more chaos which is obviously not a good thing.....But please explain anything you think you might add to this because i only strive to know more weather I be wrong or right....Thanks

We really won't ever run out of iron reserves for the same reason we won't run out of oil reserves. At some point, the cost of harvesting will outweigh the value to the market and before we reach that tipping point, an alternative will be created. And the neat thing about iron products is that they are recyclable. In fact, they are and have been being recycled for so long now that the cost of recycling them is economical (which can't be said for a lot of things). As the cost of harvesting new iron ore goes up, recyclers will pay more for scrap iron and as such people will be further incentivized to recycle steel and iron in lieu of simply discarding it. Not to mention, just like happens now, there will be more people rummaging through dumpsters looking for the ever more valuable scrap metals.

Another thing to consider is that we're already producing composite materials that are both lighter and stronger than steel and as the cost of steel increases, the cost of these materials will fall.

He who has a why to live for can bear almost any how.

-Nietzche

Oh and a thought just grazed my brain... if we're worried about running out of consumed metals, we need to look at silver. It's a lot more expensive to harvest and to recycle than is iron.